Biden, NRA Clash Over New Gun Control Proposals

[Purveyor]

Source: Associated Press

WASHINGTON (AP) - Despite fresh opposition from the National Rifle Association, the Obama administration is assembling proposals to curb gun violence that would include a ban on sales of assault weapons, limits on high-capacity ammunition magazines and universal background checks for gun buyers.

Sketching out details of the plan Thursday, Vice President Joe Biden said he would give President Barack Obama a set of recommendations by next Tuesday. The NRA, one of the pro-gun groups that met with Biden during the day, rejected the effort to limit ammunition and dug in on its opposition to an assault weapons ban, which Obama has previously said he will propose to Congress.

"The vice president made it clear, made it explicitly clear, that the president had already made up his mind on those issues," NRA president David Keene said following the meeting. "We made it clear that we disagree with them."

Opposition from the well-funded and politically powerful NRA underscores the challenges that await the White House if it seeks congressional approval for limiting guns and ammunition and greatly expanding background checks. Obama can use his executive powers to act alone on some gun measures, but his options on the proposals opposed by the NRA are limited without Congress' cooperation.

Read more: http://apnews.myway.com/article/20130111/DA3NNJQG0.html

[morningfog]

1. That is because the NRA is not a good faith negotiator. The NRA is an extremist hate group.

[Voice for Peace]

2. too bad you disagree, Mr. NRA, because he's the PRESIDENT and who the feck are you?

[ReRe]

3. Agree

[Elron Aven]

4. Expanded BG checks aren't a big deal...

...because legally private sellers are already on the hook if they sell a gun (or ammo) to a prohibited person who they know or could reasonably suspect might be prohibited.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/922

Cite: 18 USC 922 (d)

(d) It shall be unlawful for any person to
sell or otherwise dispose of any firearm or
ammunition to any person knowing or
having reasonable cause to believe that
such person— {a list of the Form 4473 disqualifications follows}

What this section of the law indicates is that in reality there is no real private sale "loophole" in terms of "law" per se because the seller is on the hook, rather there's a lack of capability for a private seller to tap into the NICS database to check on someone who's not known to them. That's an enforcement and access issue rather than something needing new restrictive law.

The other stuff above is a "law" matter, but opening up the NICS database to private sellers should not be a big deal, other than to make using it for things other than firearms sales some sort of violation...because there's always going to be some sleazy employer who would use it as a quick employment screen on a job applicant.

[The Magistrate]

6. Damn, Fella, You Just Popping Up Everywhere, Ain'tcha?

Guns, guns, guns, guns, guns, and still more guns, and then, some guns and...guns...,

"And, for those who love art ... there's sport!

[Kingofalldems]

7. Wow. Thanks

A lightbulb went on in my head when I read your post.

[bowens43]

5. Why did he even talk to these irrelevant assholes?

why not invite street gangs and organized crime groups to their opinions to? They would be as relevant.

The NRA is a criminal organization and should be treated as such.

[underpants]

8. Actually the NRA ran out of the room to whine and play victim to the camera

[lifebytheborder]

9. playing devil's advocate here

I believe our gun rights are being infringed on. The woman in GA who protected her children with a gun is a good example of responsible gun ownership. Also the young woman in OK who was protecting her baby from guys that knew her and her husband and knew her husband had died and she was alone now. She shot and killed one of them and the other one ran away. Could have been a different outcome for her and her baby if she had not had a gun. These rights should never be taken away. Do we need assault weapons? I guess that depends on what the government classifies as an assault weapon. More than ten bullets? Why should they be able to tell me how many bullets in a clip I can have? Criminals will always have guns...I live near the border and I know this for a fact. Wouldn't you want to protect yourselves and your family from someone with a gun? You cannot take a knife to a gunfight and expect to win. I believe the problem is the mental health of the people involved in these shootings and how they got their guns. A background check should flag anyone who has a mental health or criminal background. Gun shows are only there for a few days, how do you get them to get a check on someone right away? I don't know, but I do know that police officers have access to records immediately, so why can't it be done at a gun show? Don't take my gun rights away and allow the criminals to have the upper hand. I value my and my family's lives and the government does not have the right to tell me how to protect them. If there was a home invasion and the criminals (99% of the time) will always be armed with a GUN, and I did not have a gun...more than likely my family and I would be harmed or killed. I want the right to protect myself and the government (who usually have guns or secret service protecting them) does not have the right to tell me HOW to protect myself from criminals or the criminally insane. There are good and bad to gun ownership...but taking guns away from the good will only arm the bad. Criminals do not follow the laws regarding weapons and they will always get guns from our friends south of the border.